Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How does Cooperative Spell Work?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MerakSpielman" data-source="post: 2423672" data-attributes="member: 7464"><p>I always assumed it was intended to have a single spell go off, but more difficult to resist. There is preciedent for this in fantasy literature, and I assumed they were making a feat to mimic what you read about in books. For example, a wizard who violates the precepts of his order might be subject to a spell as a punishment, but his saves are astronomical. So the thirty or so members of the order combine their efforts to insure the spell takes hold.</p><p></p><p>As a DM, this seems like a fine feat for NPC wizards to have. But having one spell per wizard go off seems hideously overpowered. I create a cabal of wizards, for example, all with cooperative spell. The cabal can essentially cast spells that cannot be saved against or resisted. What seems more reasonable - to have one spell that cannot be resisted, or a hundred spells that cannot be resisted all going off at the same time?</p><p></p><p>As for the rather silly argument that the feat would have to have extra text about a person who chooses the target and effects of the spell... why on earth would you consider this necessary? All participants have agreed upon which spell to cast - was it necessary to have a single person chosen to do this? They've all agreed when they're going to cast the spell - also without a specific, chosen leader. Is it really THAT much of a stretch to assume they've also already discussed ahead the actual casting where to target it and what it's particular effects, if any, will be?</p><p></p><p>I think the real debate we're having is over the <em>intent</em> of the feat. Is it intended to be a minor boost for 2 multiclass casters in the same party - who will probably rarely be able to use it, and have used up a valuable feat slot? If this is how you envision it being used, perhaps having 2 spells go off isn't that unreasonable.</p><p></p><p>Or is it intended to make a large group of single-class casters able to cast individual spells with obscenely high saving throws? This situation makes a single spell much more reasonable. Can you imagine a Geas cast with a save DC of 150? Or a Mark of Justice?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MerakSpielman, post: 2423672, member: 7464"] I always assumed it was intended to have a single spell go off, but more difficult to resist. There is preciedent for this in fantasy literature, and I assumed they were making a feat to mimic what you read about in books. For example, a wizard who violates the precepts of his order might be subject to a spell as a punishment, but his saves are astronomical. So the thirty or so members of the order combine their efforts to insure the spell takes hold. As a DM, this seems like a fine feat for NPC wizards to have. But having one spell per wizard go off seems hideously overpowered. I create a cabal of wizards, for example, all with cooperative spell. The cabal can essentially cast spells that cannot be saved against or resisted. What seems more reasonable - to have one spell that cannot be resisted, or a hundred spells that cannot be resisted all going off at the same time? As for the rather silly argument that the feat would have to have extra text about a person who chooses the target and effects of the spell... why on earth would you consider this necessary? All participants have agreed upon which spell to cast - was it necessary to have a single person chosen to do this? They've all agreed when they're going to cast the spell - also without a specific, chosen leader. Is it really THAT much of a stretch to assume they've also already discussed ahead the actual casting where to target it and what it's particular effects, if any, will be? I think the real debate we're having is over the [i]intent[/i] of the feat. Is it intended to be a minor boost for 2 multiclass casters in the same party - who will probably rarely be able to use it, and have used up a valuable feat slot? If this is how you envision it being used, perhaps having 2 spells go off isn't that unreasonable. Or is it intended to make a large group of single-class casters able to cast individual spells with obscenely high saving throws? This situation makes a single spell much more reasonable. Can you imagine a Geas cast with a save DC of 150? Or a Mark of Justice? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How does Cooperative Spell Work?
Top